Spectre (2015) - 7 stars out of 10

Spectre (2015) - 7 stars out of 10

“Spectre” is a worthwhile one-time watch in the world of Bond films.  It has an interesting story balanced with impressive action sequences but it didn't grab me in the same way as "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall."  Besides, I don't ever want to watch that sequence with the miniature drills again.  You can count on a successful execution of the Bond formula when you pair up an Oscar-winning director like Sam Mendes with quality actors.  Daniel Craig continues to masterfully interpret the role of James Bond with his smooth delivery of sophisticated dialogue.  Léa Seydoux is a worthy addition to the “Bond girl” legacy and is more of a sidekick than a fling.  Inevitably, I would have liked to see more of Christoph Waltz.  He makes a great villain in any film and his relationship to Bond gave this story a cool twist, yet he appears in a much smaller percentage of the film than you would expect.  It helps to build the mystery of his character but Waltz’s charisma would have helped to keep the film in the moments when it began to drag on.  In regard to the special effects, they are stunning.  There are explosions, collapsing buildings, and an amazing car chase through Rome.  I do feel that the film goes a little too far over the top with two helicopter sequences and a plane sequence.  I'm pretty good at suspending my disbelief but they were pushing it by the second set of helicopter acrobatics.  Still, it has everything that you expect from a Bond film.  It actually may have been too formulaic.  There is something to be said for the extended opening sequence (the Dia de los Muertos setting was particularly cool), artistic title sequence with Sam Smith’s Oscar-winning song, and debriefing scene at MI6 that we expect from the Bond series.  After that, there weren’t many surprises in the pacing of the film as we could predict “There’s probably going to be a big chase scene coming up in the next few minutes.”  Even though “Spectre” inevitably falls short of the highly lauded “Skyfall” that preceeded it, this is a positive addition to the Bond catalog of films and is worth experiencing once.

[Pictured: The filming of this scene with the bad guy hidden by shadows is classic Bond]

Ant-Man (2015) - 8 stars out of 10

Ant-Man (2015) - 8 stars out of 10

“Ant-Man” has rejuvenated the neverending string of Marvel movies that have all started to run together.  I love Iron Man, Captain America, and the rest of the Avengers as much as the next guy but this film has given the superhero universe a much-needed break from itself.  Marvel films are great at incorporating comedy into their serious plots but “Ant-Man” is all about poking fun at the dramatic superhero moments (albeit on a much lesser scale than “Deadpool”).  The fight with Falcon and the giant Thomas the Tank Engine are just a few moments where the writers aren’t afraid to completely take us out of the serious moment with something hilarious.  The training sequence is another great example of the film’s perfect ration of comedy to action.  It's a little cheesy when he's riding around on flying ants, but all great superhero comedies need that cheesiness.  I typically wouldn't want to see Paul Rudd in a superhero role but he works well for this one.  So much of the film’s humor is dependent on his chemistry with Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lilly, and his band of misfits.  Michael Peña and David Dastmalchian create laughs every time that they’re on screen, with the “Titanic” reference being my favorite of the film.  The actors bring life to the characters but the key factor for this film is the design of its script.  The writers use some sleight of hand to distract our attention from the far-fetched shrinking concept and onto something more believable.  Somehow, the entire thing seems feasible.  Even the tank.  By centering the story on the heist, we question how the Ant-Man suit can help the main characters accomplish their mission instead of questioning the science of the suit itself.  Not to mention, any story that involves a heist gets bonus points and this one has two!  Pair this story with super-sized special effects and you have one of the coolest superheroes in the universe.  The fight sequences where he's transitioning from big to small are visually magnificent while the fight in the helicopter is unforgettable.  “Ant-Man” is a comedy first and a superhero film second, which delivers a healthy dose of levity to a genre that is often too serious.

[Pictured: The constantly changing perspective between large and small keeps this film visually interesting from start to finish]

Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey (1991) - 4 stars out of 10

Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey (1991) - 4 stars out of 10

“Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey” is pretty much what you would expect from the sequel to a dumb comedy.  The jokes were funnier the first time around, the quirks of the characters were more amusing the first time around, and the story isn’t as interesting.  The movie does have its moments.  The possession scene the Grim Reaper challenge sequence, and the “Uranus” joke will have you laughing out loud, but there are so many other moments that remind us that the novelty of the first film has worn off.  The airheaded charm of the main characters in the first film feels more like bad acting in this sequel.  “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” works because of the historical characters in anachronistic situations.  But when you remove the situational comedy of the historical characters, the film relies solely on the character development of Bill and Ted and there isn't really anywhere for it to go.  The redeeming quality of this film is William Sadler’s performance as the Grim Reaper.  The character was very well written and Sadler creates the best comedic moments of the film through his line delivery and accent.  Even after providing us with a few laughs, the disjointed resolution of the story does not deliver much of a payoff.  “Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey” strikes a few positive chords but I would much rather watch “Excellent Adventure” than watch this sequel again.

[Pictured: The situational comedy surrounding Death saves this from being a total waste]

The Jungle Book (1967) - 9 stars out of 10

The Jungle Book (1967) - 9 stars out of 10

"The Jungle Book" is a simple story of friendship and finding your place in the world.  I think that it is often overlooked because it lacks the attention-grabbing opening number that immediately draws us into the story; however, each chapter of this episodic presentation works together to create an outstanding progression.  I can't believe that I never recognized this piece as a masterpiece.  I appreciate the complex plots of modern Disney films like "Frozen" and "Zootopia," but there is something beautiful about a simplistic and straightforward story.  After the disappointment of "The Sword in the Stone," Walt Disney decided to be actively involved in every aspect of this film and it shows.  This is the last animated film that Walt personally touched before his death and this straightforward, character-driven story is a tribute to his ability to create pure magic from simplicity.  He managed to “Disney-fy” Rudyard Kiplings's story to remove its dark tone while capturing the important lessons and characters from the original.  I love Baloo so much. He's one of the most lovable and underrated Disney characters.  Perhaps it's the familiarity with Phil Harris' voice in “The Aristocats” (Thomas O'Malley) and “Robin Hood” (Little John), or maybe it's because he improvised most of his lines to give them a sense of genuine honesty, but you can't help but want Baloo to be your papa bear from the moment that you meet him.  Then when you throw in other Disney voices like Sterling Holloway (Winnie the Pooh) as Kaa, Bruce Reitherman (Christopher Robin) as Mowgli, Sebastian Cabot (Pooh Narrator) as Bagheera, and Verna Felton (Fairy Godmother, Queen of Hearts) in her final film role as Winifred the Elephant, the entire film is predisposed to impressive chemistry.  It is interesting that Louis Prima continues to live on through his character of King Louie, who captures the swing style of the famous bandleader.  The cherry on top is George Sanders’ successful provision of a truly evil voice for Shere Khan that is on par with Scar and Judge Frollo, some of Disney's greatest villain voices.  The story entertains with sight gags that enhance the story without distracting from it.  The brief elephant sequence is one of the cleverest in any Disney movie, creating a comical military satire with a ragtag group of elephants.  J. Pat O'Mallet as Hathi, the elephant general, is perfection.  “Robin Hood” later borrowed some animated moments from the film (the elephant trumpet, King Louie’s dance), as well as basing Little John off of Baloo due to budget restrictions.  This may seem like a cheap move but in modern times, it adds awesome Easter eggs to these films.  As usual, much of this film’s magic comes from its expertly crafted musical numbers.  The back-to-back performances of "The Bare Necessities" and "I Wan'na Be Like You" will practically have you out of your seat and dancing along, while "My Own Home" is one of the most beautiful songs composed by the Sherman Brothers.  And let's not forget that there's a great barbershop piece sung by the Liverpool-accented vultures who are awfully reminiscent of a popular 1960's mop-topped quartet.  When you combine these numbers with the heartbreaking string music by George Bruns at two key moments in the film, you have the complete package.  I made the mistake of waiting too long to see “The Jungle Book” through adult eyes.  Don’t make the same mistake as me.  Prioritize this film so that you can fully appreciate the last masterpiece that Walt brought to life prior to his death.

[Pictured: The thick-lined animation gives the film that classic Disney feel]

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989) - 7 stars out of 10

Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989) - 7 stars out of 10

“Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure” is a totally righteous ode to 80’s heavy metal and stupid humor.  This cult classic does not contain a single serious moment so you need to be in a “Wayne’s World”/”Billy Madison” mood before you watch.  The plot is simple – these high school airheads need to get an A+ on their final history project or they will fail their senior year “most egregiously.”  Why do we care?  Because the future of humankind hinges on them forming a band and using their “most excellent” guitar music to bring the universe into peaceful harmony.  The road to success involves a time travelling phone booth that will allow them to collect historical figures and bring them back to their high school to help with their presentation.  It sounds like the worst movie ever, but it absolutely works.  The intentional overacting of Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter drives the story along at a fast pace.  George Carlin ties it all together as the straight man that gives direction to the clueless duo.  Highlights of the film include Napoleon eating ice cream, Napoleon at a bowling alley, Napoleon on waterslides, and a mall madness sequence where Billy the Kid, Socrates (pronounced “So-craytes”), Abraham Lincoln, Beethoven, and other historical figures create total chaos in modern times.  The entire film is cleverly educational while manipulating the legacies of these characters to create comedy.  My favorite moments occur when the main characters manipulate time to help themselves in the past, even though the script purposefully creates inexpiable time paradoxes just to mess with us.  “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure” is a relatively family-friendly comedy that has become iconic throughout the years and will have you continually laughing out loud as long as you are in the right mood!

[Pictured: Every scene with Socrates is a good scene]

Sin City (2005) - 8 stars out of 10

Sin City (2005) - 8 stars out of 10

This movie totally rocked! "Sin City" is an incredible feat of visual artistry but is definitely intended for strong-stomached adults.  This visually arresting film noir mimics the appearance of a comic book through unique camera filters, it's unique treatment of color (and the lack thereof), and its occasional incorporation of animation.  I would classify this film as "ultra-violent" with graphic imagery goes beyond many horror films.  The artistic display of blood is reminiscent of “300” (inspired by the same graphic novel artist); however, the violent content is much more extreme and it is difficult to watch much of the decapitation, castration, and torture.  A lot of this story thrives on the disturbing level of “Saw.”  My personal opinion is that the nudity, profanity, and violence are excessive, but it seems that they didn't have a choice if they wanted to stay true to Frank Miller's graphic novels.  I love the artistic approach to noir film but the content was beyond entertaining.  From an acting perspective, the cast is full of big names including Bruce Willis, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Rosario Dawson, Michael Clarke Duncan, Benicio Del Toro, and Elijah Wood.  Many of the performances feel overdramatic but that is the style of a noir film.  Mickey Rourke is the particular standout in the cast.   More than anything, this movie really makes me miss Brittany Murphy.  My main complaint is that the nature of the film only allows for most of the actors to have 10-15 minutes of screen time.  You can only fit so many members of this ensemble cast on screen at a time but I still wish that their characters had more time to develop.  Robert Rodriguez’s ambitious undertaking creates a vivid visual journey that stays true to Miller’s graphic novels and has a stunning “wow” factor.  “Sin City” is one of the grittiest films that you will ever see so be warned that, even if you can generally be tolerant of violence to enjoy an interesting story, this one may go beyond tolerability.  The real question is how much graphic content are you willing to sit through for a big visual payoff?

[Pictured: "Sin City" transcends the line between live-action film and comic book]

Hostage (2005) - 6 stars out of 10

Hostage (2005) - 6 stars out of 10

"Hostage" is a decent action movie but gets far too aggressive with profanity for the story that it tells.  Unlike films like “Shawshank Redemption” that use profanity to create a sense of realism, this film does the opposite by using an unacceptable amount of swearing (we’re talking one character shouting the f-word or s-word 4-6 times in row) in place of intelligible dialogue.  There are many moments where a strong point could be made with one f-word, or even another choice of profanity, or imagine a world when a well-written line that doesn’t rely on profanity could make an impact; instead, the writers turn to repeated f-words to show frustration.  I find this completely unacceptable in this sort of film.  Outside of the profanity, Bruce Willis revisits his traditional kick-butt cop role with a variation in which he has to become a vigilante because of a clever plot twist.  He does a nice job while the rest of the cast is very average.  This movie makes me really mad at dumb teenage boys who give in to peer pressure.  The events of the film escalate quickly and (for the most part) realistically, but the entire of the story develops from one mentally unhealthy boy who is able to convince two others to get in trouble with him.  Although no part of this film could be classified as horror, there are a few scenes that are so intense that you’ll want to retreat to a happy place.  “Hostage” is definitely a step down from the “Die Hard” series but it is worth watching for its intensity and unpredictable nature.  Just prepare yourself for an abundance of swearing that is not necessary in portraying these events.

[Pictured: The movie has a few nightmarish moments that will stick with you]